Submitted by Pixie__Pink t3_z7f869 in personalfinance
theoriginalharbinger t1_iy6b8rd wrote
Age is far less important than people think. Maintenance and proper diagnosis matter more.
I'd take a 20-year-old Corolla before a 10-year-old VW. I'd take a 300,000 mile Corolla driven by Grandma Mae and dealer-serviced every 3k over a 150,000-mile Corolla driven by Big Steve the 16yo and hooned in the high school parking lot.
the_whole_arsenal t1_iy6fs7j wrote
Yeah, pretty much this. Maintenance can add 10 years to a car or lack of can remove 5 years from a car. Stuff like a $50 oil change is a small insurance policy. Honda says I can go 8k miles, but I do 5k. Over 150k miles the difference would be 19 vs 30 oil changes, or $550. But I'll get 300k miles, and the guy that goes 8k will likely only hit 200k before forking out $3,500 on rebuilding the lower engine (oil pump, piston rings, pickup tube and bearings).
mistermephist0 t1_iy6inz1 wrote
Is this the case for newer cars though? Maybe the same idea, but the timeline different. i.e. 8 vs 12 years. Just feels like cars these days are not made the same
[deleted] t1_iy6lmya wrote
[removed]
Pixie__Pink OP t1_iyaa2so wrote
Also a fair point
ScipioAfricanvs t1_iy6mzt0 wrote
I don’t think it’s wise to completely be dismissive of age as you suggest. Wear items go based on both time or mileage (or a combination of both). Rubbers, seals, electrical components, etc. are all more likely to fail as a function of age regardless of how well maintained the car is.
Pixie__Pink OP t1_iyaa1qo wrote
Very fair point.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments